Table 1.

Table summarizing the sample size (number of specimens, 18S rRNA sequences, and genetic reads) and richness (number of morphotypes, entities, OTUs, eOTUs, and sequence variants) obtained from each taxonomic method

	Single individuals					Metabarcoding
Phylum	Specimen	Morphotype	18S rRNA Sequence	Entity	OTU	Reads eOTU	eOTU	Reads SV	SV
Annelida	163	20	133	23	27	9248	178	9893	63
Gastrotrichaa	133	37	107	27	38	265	20	1083	12
Molluscaa	96	22	81	6	17	4751	36	4423	22
Nematoda	108	37	73	2	37	7818	155	8243	89
Nemerteaa	94	23	83	9	34	235	12	242	8
Platyhelminthes	208	38	163	42	48	5666	120	5993	87
Xenacoelomorphaa	33	10	28	7	10	4223	26	640	12
Total	835	187	668	116	211	32,206	547	29,279	293

Phyla for which richness recognized with morphology-based taxonomy is higher than richness recognized with at least one metabarcoding approach are indicated by superscript “a”

Morphotypes were identified with comparative morphology; entities were recovered via DNA taxonomy (GMYC model) from single specimens

OTU operational taxonomic units recovered via 18S rRNA sequences from single specimens, eOTU operational taxonomic units recovered via metabarcoding, SV sequence variants recovered via metabarcoding